PDA

View Full Version : Question For Those Who Think KW WIll Sign a FA Pitcher


Sox Mobile
12-14-2004, 03:53 PM
I believe KW will sign a FA pitcher as much as I believe pigs can fly.

I dont think he has any intention of spending the $$.

However, I would gladly have my nose rubbed in it if he did.

But here's my question.

Randy Johnson made 35 starts last year. How many games did he win?

Was he a 20 game winner?

Did he win half of his starts?

The answers are no, with an ERA of 2.60........a record of 16-14.

Why? no offense of course.

What stud FA pitcher is going to jump at the chance to play with a team that just lost 3 of its best RBI producers and has 1 that might not start the season?

I dont see how we can trade for anyone, whats left to trade?

Our last bullet?

Baby Fisk
12-14-2004, 03:58 PM
Wow. Bleaker than a gothic novel. :o:

MarkyBear
12-14-2004, 04:01 PM
What stud FA pitcher is going to jump at the chance to play with a team that just lost 3 of its best RBI producers and has 1 that might not start the season?

3??? Whom else did they lose, I thought it was just Mags and Lee or are you including Jose V???

Palehose13
12-14-2004, 04:16 PM
Well, in case you forgot there are still guys who can put up big numbers. And why would they want to come here? A pitcher's best friend is a good defense behind him. The White Sox now have a pretty damn good defense.

Ol' No. 2
12-14-2004, 04:22 PM
I believe KW will sign a FA pitcher as much as I believe pigs can fly.

I dont think he has any intention of spending the $$.

However, I would gladly have my nose rubbed in it if he did.

But here's my question.

Randy Johnson made 35 starts last year. How many games did he win?

Was he a 20 game winner?

Did he win half of his starts?

The answers are no, with an ERA of 2.60........a record of 16-14.

Why? no offense of course.

What stud FA pitcher is going to jump at the chance to play with a team that just lost 3 of its best RBI producers and has 1 that might not start the season?

I dont see how we can trade for anyone, whats left to trade?

Our last bullet?Right you are. By my count there are still two and maybe even three guys in the projected lineup who won't hit 20 or more HR. Kenny must not stop until he has a team made up of ALL HR hitters. Even the pitchers, for when they have to play in the NL parks.

bobj4400
12-14-2004, 04:22 PM
And their worst enemy is US Coors Field.

MRKARNO
12-14-2004, 04:23 PM
I believe KW will sign a FA pitcher as much as I believe pigs can fly.

I dont think he has any intention of spending the $$.

However, I would gladly have my nose rubbed in it if he did.

But here's my question.

Randy Johnson made 35 starts last year. How many games did he win?

Was he a 20 game winner?

Did he win half of his starts?

The answers are no, with an ERA of 2.60........a record of 16-14.

Why? no offense of course.

What stud FA pitcher is going to jump at the chance to play with a team that just lost 3 of its best RBI producers and has 1 that might not start the season?

I dont see how we can trade for anyone, whats left to trade?

Our last bullet?
:chickenlittle

thedudeabides
12-14-2004, 04:24 PM
AS proven time and time again, they will come if the $$$$$$ is right.

OEO Magglio
12-14-2004, 04:26 PM
Yeesh.....people got to stop thinking that this offense sucks. We haven't lost all of our power, I will guarantee all of you this offense still hits over 200 homers. Also this could be a much more consistant offense then we've had in years.

HomeFish
12-14-2004, 04:30 PM
Yeesh.....people got to stop thinking that this offense sucks. We haven't lost all of our power, I will guarantee all of you this offense still hits over 200 homers. Also this could be a much more consistant offense then we've had in years.

Losing our two most consistent hitters, adding a guy who's average has jumped drastically over his career, adding a guy who hit .314 one season and .244 the next...that's what you call a more consistant offense?

OEO Magglio
12-14-2004, 04:34 PM
Losing our two most consistent hitters, adding a guy who's average has jumped drastically over his career, adding a guy who hit .314 one season and .244 the next...that's what you call a more consistant offense?
Hey homefish when was the last time our offense was consistant?? If pods can bat around .260-.270 he's going to steal 80 to 90 bases giving more opportunities for aaron, frank, pauly, dye, there is a chance this offense can be more consistant then in past years. I'm not saying it's going to happen but it's definitely a possibility. The one thing I find comical is how everyone wanted to get rid of the all or nothing attitude, now that we're doing that, it's the wrong thing to do.......I don't get it. :?:

PorkChopExpress
12-14-2004, 04:49 PM
The Diamondbacks did not have a single person hit more than 17 HR's nor get more than 80 RBI's. That is a poor offense. Last year Rowand had 24 HR's, 69 RBI's in less than a complete season; Uribe had 23 HR's and 74 RBI's; Crede had 21 HR's and 69 RBI's; Frank had 18 HR's and 49 RBI's in a half-season. I assume Konerko is gone as any part of a trade to bring us Johnson, so I won't discuss him. We also added Dye who in a sub-par year in a pitcher's park hit 23 HR's and 80 RBI's. That doesn't even take into consideration the intangibles like an increase in Dye's numbers by playing in the Cell, or the increase in Rowand's numbers by playing all year and having a speedster like Podsednik in front of him. Our offense is way better than Arizona's and can easily provide someone like Johnson with the run support that he needs.

SouthSide_HitMen
12-14-2004, 04:57 PM
Kenny Williams signed TWO free agent pitchers - Walker and Hermanson.

Oh, you are talking about actual major league free agent pitchers.

Flight #24
12-14-2004, 04:58 PM
For the power-hungry among you:

Pods: 5HR (9 in 2004)
ARow: 25HR (24 in 2004)
Frank/Everett: 35HR (23 in 2004)
Konerko: 35HR (41in 2004)
Dye: 30 HR (23 in 2004)
Uribe: 25HR (23 in 2004)
Crede: 25 HR (21 in 2004)
Davis/Burke: 15HR (6 in 2004)
Willie Harris: 2HR (2 in 2004)

Grand total: 197HR

Which would have ranked 11th in MLB. And these are fairly conservative numbers. Now factor in that a lot more of these are multi-run shots, and I'd say while our O will slip somewhat from 2004, it won't be falling off the cliff like the chicken littles would have you believe. But our rotation & bullpen will be light-years better. Not to mention D and more consistency from game to game.

LVSoxFan
12-14-2004, 04:58 PM
I agree that a fourth starter is the #1 priority for the Sox and has been since mid-season last year. I say "fourth" and not fifth because realistically: since we have to keep Garland, he's going to be the fifth. Somebody not at his level even will help us little.

My baseball nut stat-heavy friends actually applaud the trade, saying it gives us the speed we need (especially for our non-existent stolen bases) and a good setup man for Shingo. Plus now we've got a fast outfield. Ozzie wanted to play "small ball", and Williams' trades seem to be confirming that.

As others here have said, what's the point of having a lineup of power hitters when it would turn into feast-or-famine last season--we'd crush some team and score 18 runs, then go three games where we'd score one. Ozzie's made no secret he'd rather have the consistency than the power--and I'm not sure there's a total power blackout when we still have Paulie, Gload and Rowand on the team. If Crede ever gets it together, look out.

Of course, that's a huge "if."

If we don't acquire the fourth starter than we are right back where we were last season, where every fifth game was a virtual guaranteed loss. Even during our hot first half, this was a leak that would eventually become fatal as the offense got streaky and even some close games were blown.

Sign Clement already and let's get on with it--he's the perfect fourth starter and his ex-Cub status would make him wildly popular with Sox fans. He had a rough year least year but also zero run support from the Cubs. How many one and two run games did he end up taking a loss?

But if this is it and we don't go any further--or pick up some scrub--expect to see us fighting for third place this season, behind the Cleveland Indians.

Sox Mobile
12-14-2004, 05:06 PM
The Diamondbacks did not have a single person hit more than 17 HR's nor get more than 80 RBI's. That is a poor offense. Last year Rowand had 24 HR's, 69 RBI's in less than a complete season; Uribe had 23 HR's and 74 RBI's; Crede had 21 HR's and 69 RBI's; Frank had 18 HR's and 49 RBI's in a half-season. I assume Konerko is gone as any part of a trade to bring us Johnson, so I won't discuss him. We also added Dye who in a sub-par year in a pitcher's park hit 23 HR's and 80 RBI's. That doesn't even take into consideration the intangibles like an increase in Dye's numbers by playing in the Cell, or the increase in Rowand's numbers by playing all year and having a speedster like Podsednik in front of him. Our offense is way better than Arizona's and can easily provide someone like Johnson with the run support that he needs.
Pork Chop, thanx for a great response with all the stats.

Although the numbers i see dont give me great comfort, I'm happy to know some have confidence in them.

One thing to consider......hopefully with steroids out of the picture, our current lineups offensive numbers might be much more meaningful.

jabrch
12-14-2004, 05:10 PM
I just wish some of the folks here ran bookmaking operations. There'd be a ton of money to be won betting the over on Sox wins I think. Cuz people here make it sound like this team is going to be last place, and going to win 70 games or fewer. It's kinda funny.

Lip Man 1
12-14-2004, 05:15 PM
No history shows they will win between 82-84, the cycle of mediocrity continues.

Lip

HomeFish
12-14-2004, 05:19 PM
Hey homefish when was the last time our offense was consistant?? If pods can bat around .260-.270 he's going to steal 80 to 90 bases giving more opportunities for aaron, frank, pauly, dye, there is a chance this offense can be more consistant then in past years. I'm not saying it's going to happen but it's definitely a possibility. The one thing I find comical is how everyone wanted to get rid of the all or nothing attitude, now that we're doing that, it's the wrong thing to do.......I don't get it. :?:

All I'm saying is that if you take an inconsistent offense, subtract two of the most consistent players, and add two more inconsistent players, the net gain for consistency is still in the negative.